Profile

Essays by Anish Pradhan

Art has always been the the culmination of all the creativity of a nation expressed through various mediums like paintings, sculptures etc. However, the issue whether government funding of arts is detrimental to or essential for the enhancement is a debatable and complex one. Definitely, one can argue that giving funds to arts can make artists greedy and they can use their status to earn more revenue by using unfair means. But, a closer look at this unveils that this mentality does not originate because of the funding. That is inherent to individuals and even in the absence of funding, they would still take unfair means like plagiarizing to move up their status. Therefore, I believe that if government gives more funds for the arts, it will be beneficial to both the general people and the independent artists.

The author here claims that there will be an increased demand for heating oil at northeastern United States and recommends to invest in industries like the heating oil industry. To bolster it, the author tries to justify that as the forecasters predicted, the weather will be below normal temperature and the trend will go on for some more years and as there are more homes being built in that region, there would be an increase in heating oil sells. However, a closer look at the chain of reasoning unveils that there unstated assumptions and vague definitions like the absoluteness of the climate forecasters' predictions, assuming that people will continue using heating oil throughout the years and new homes are built just as the way they were in the past . These weaken the author's argument. Therefore, the argument is unsubstantiated and muddled.

The vice president concludes here that their company, Dura-Socks, can make more profits by not expending on a manufacturing process which increases the durability of the socks up to two years. The argument is stated in such a way that it assumes too much and fails to consider the complexities and intricacies of causality. To bolster the conclusion, the author tries to justify that the customers would buy new socks every three months even if the socks are durable up to two years and increasing lifetime of socks is wasted effort. However, a closer look at the chain of reasoning unveils that there are unstated assumptions and vague definitions like the effect of advertisements, the nature of the study etc. These weaken the author's recommendation greatly. Therefore, the argument can be considered unsubstantiated and muddled.

The modern life comes with an abundance of methods for luxuries and amenities. Obviously, with a great number of luxuries available, the issue whether these conveniences of modern life hinders the growth of independent individuals or accelerates it, is a complex and debatable one. Indeed, one can argue that it accelerates the individual growth in terms of personality and intelligence by challenging them with new problems that come with the conveniences. But, if we look closely we can understand that the people who are going to grow with the availability of all these amenities, are going to grow anyway. They are inherently not dependent on the luxuries. Therefore, I strongly agree that luxuries and conveniences of this modern era severely prevents people from developing into strong characters.

The statement tells us about the debatable issue of whether competition or cooperation is better suited for young people to succeed in government, industry or any other fields. Indeed, competition seems to be a good choice as it can push people to their edges to do better in those fields. However, failing to beat the competition can lead to severe depression and cripple the emotional growth. Therefore, I agree with the perspective that the sense of cooperation, not competition, is necessary for the young population to succeed in any field.

The statement talks about the debatable issue of whether a nation's greatness can be measured by the quality and achievements of its notable sons and daughters like artists, scientists and rulers or by the overall welfare of all its people. Indeed, looking at the achievements of the rulers and notable people may seem to indicate the greatness of the nation. However, they only make up a small percent of the population and don't show us the complete picture. As a result, I believe that a nation's greatness can be measured by how well all of the people are doing in every aspect.

This statement brings up that arguable issue of whether competition compromises the learning process in all educational levels or it enhances it. Definitely, it is debated that competition makes people push their limit and improve. However, failing to improve can lead to depression and ultimately, a pessimistic view on learning. Therefore, I agree with the perspective that competition degrades the learning process severely.

The author suggests that greater budget on advertising would make more people come to the Super Screen produced movies because the quality of the movies is not to blame. The arguments presented here to support that statement is full with holes and assumptions.